Dismissed

Faizan and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC17 Dec 2019A482/46635/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court refused to quash the charge-sheet and criminal proceedings lodged against applicants for alleged assault, holding that disputed facts could not be adjudicated under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The court granted a stay against coercive proceedings for thirty days contingent on surrender.

What did the court decide?

Quash and proceedings refused; stay on coercive action for 30 days contingent on surrender and bail application.

Faizan and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 46635 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Faizan And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants for quashing of the Charge-sheet No.246 of 2018 dated 24.12.2018 as well as the entire proceedings of Case No.1414 of 2019 (State Vs. Faizan and others) arising out of Case Crime No.370 of 2018, under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Ganjdundwara, District Kasganj, pending before the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kasganj.

¶7

As per the allegations made in the FIR, it is alleged that on 16.12.2018 at about 6:00 PM, the applicants forcibly entered in the house of the victim and assaulted him. On account of the assault made by the applicants, the victim Asif suffered injuries on his person and has been medically examined.

¶8

The contention of counsel for the applicants is that no offence against the applicants is disclosed and the present application has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He has also pointed out certain documents in support of his contention.

¶9

Per contra, learned AGA has submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in the FIR and the material collected during the course of investigation, prima facie offence is clearly made out against the applicants and as such, charge-sheet as well as the entire proceedings cannot be quashed.

¶10

From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case, at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants. All the submissions made at the bar relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

¶11

At this stage, disputed question of fact cannot be considered, therefore, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, AIR

¶12

1960 SC 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P. Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another, (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cri.) 283 , the prayer for quashing the charge-sheet as well as the entire proceedings is refused.

¶13

However, it is directed that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within thirty days from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided in view of settled law laid down by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgment passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) .

¶14

For a period of thirty days from today or till the applicants surrender and apply for bail, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants. However, in case, the applicants do not appear before the court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.

¶15

With the aforesaid directions, this application under Section 482 CrPC is finally disposed of .

¶16

Order Date :- 17.12.2019

¶17

Zafar

Faizan and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Faizan and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rakesh Grover Vs State of U.P.

Rakesh Verma and 2 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Maya Mishra Vs State of U.P. and 4 Ors.

Jugal Kishore and 2 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sabhajeet Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Pinki Pandey and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.